Per the CBC, the Canadian government is finally going to implement rules about how airlines advertise airfares...

I for one, think that it is about time. It was one thing when airfares were quoted on a "plus tax" basis, as taxes are beyond the airlines' control and are the same for all. But the present practice of discounting fares but adding "surcharges" or "fees" for fuel, insurance, etc, is very annoying.

I also don't understand why this has been tolerated for so long. If a store advertised a tv for $199, but asked to pay a "showroom rent surcharge" of $200, they would be nailed to the wall for misleading adversting.

They want to make the airline advertising like gasoline or liquor in Canada. Whatever we see, the price includes all taxes.

On the one hand consumers will think this will work better for them because it's simpler. But simpler pricing is not necessarily better pricing. For example it's easier to hide baggage fees or fuel surcharges in a simple price. From an airline's point of view I completely understand why they do not advertise the tax because they sell the fare, not the tax.

This bill has come up I think because of complaints from the usual crowd who doesn't bother to read the agreement prior to purchase. They then willingly sign & then are shocked that the company had the audacity to do as it said in the agreement & complain. As usual they get the ear of the public because it's easy to point the finger at the faceless corporation.

I would settle for the legal requirement to advertise a price that includes:
-base fare;
-unavoidable charges (taxes, fuel, etc...);
-cost of highest option when the passenger has to pick among several for a mandatory feature (eg: highest payment processing fee).

Anything else that the customer has a complete choice to add on or not (luggage, food, etc...) can be left off the price, as long as the price is accompanied by a not-so-small disclaimer that "optional features are extra."

Quoting YYZYYT (Thread starter):
Are there any other jurisdictions where this adverstising is regulated?

It's already regulated in Europe, insofar as taxes and surcharges have to be included, but if I was a regulator, I'd go much further. I'd define a flight as containing the following: a ticket including all taxes, charges, fees, etc., paying for it (with a payment method that more than half of the customers have access to, e.g. credit/debit card and NOT some obscure Visa Electron thingy), checking one piece of luggage, check-in (at the airport), and boarding. Also, using the onboard toilet. Whatever you charge a customer for all this will be the price you're allowed to advertize. You're welcome to offer reductions, say if the passenger chooses not to check their luggage, but THIS will have to go into the footnotes, not the other way around. Also, you're only allowed to advertize with it if at least 20% of your tickets will actually be available at that price.

Airlines should compete by quality of service and price, not by who's best in fooling customers.

Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.

Canadian airlines are opposed to this ruling, stating that it will permit foreign carriers to compete by advertising base fares only. While this may be true, it will have to take a pretty clueless person not to realise that the all-in purchase price they accept is comparable to those offered by Canadian airlines.
But again, perhaps that's what the domestic airlines are worried about - that once a customer is lured by the seemingly low fare and navigates through the purchase procedure to be confronted with the real cost of the ticket, they may decide they've "already come this far" and are one click away from completing the sale, rather than canceling the transaction and going with the local airline for essentially the same price. On that aspect, they have a point.
So, how to address this? Require all airlines selling tickets in Canada to adopt the new all-in price advertising.

Quoting whiteguy (Reply 6):So now they'll advertise the price as $305 to FLL.

Yes, but theoretically, a US competitor will be able to advertise a flight for say, $250. Naturally, we will all flock to that site and spend several minutes completing the transaction to the point where the credit card comes out to the tune of....$305-ish. Do you abandon the transaction now, or spend even more time going back to the first option for no or negligible financial gain?

Quoting threepoint (Reply 7):Yes, but theoretically, a US competitor will be able to advertise a flight for say, $250.

Why will a US competitor be able to advertise at a lower price? If they advertise at the same place they are required to follow the same rules. I.e. a US airline advertising in Canada will need to follow Canadian rules and a Canadian airline advertising in US can do so following US rules.

Quoting GerbenYYZ (Reply 3):I'm all for all-inclusive pricing. It's rediculous that a $22 one way flight from Toronto to Fort Lauderdale ends up costing $305 (Flight Centre seat sale).

You still see the final price you have to pay before you commit to the fare and can always find out before you purchase the flight what extras you have to pay. As a consumer I would assume you would look before you leap so to speak and don't come and tell anybody that you were mis-informed about the price you have to pay.

Quoting cmf (Reply 8):Quoting threepoint (Reply 7):
Yes, but theoretically, a US competitor will be able to advertise a flight for say, $250.

Why will a US competitor be able to advertise at a lower price? If they advertise at the same place they are required to follow the same rules. I.e. a US airline advertising in Canada will need to follow Canadian rules and a Canadian airline advertising in US can do so following US rules.

Yes, but US carriers can also advertise domestic fares from nearby US border points (e.g. Buffalo, Bellingham, etc.) where none of the international taxes and customs/immgration fees applicable to transborder flights apply.

Quoting pnd100 (Reply 1):
They want to make the airline advertising like gasoline or liquor in Canada. Whatever we see, the price includes all taxes

Personally - I oppose tax inclusive pricing. I want the public to know how much they are paying in taxes. I also oppose withholding. Again - people need to feel the pain of that major check. What I think is ridiculous is that my $188 RT fare DEN-SEA next month as 99.17 in taxes.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 10):Yes, but US carriers can also advertise domestic fares from nearby US border points (e.g. Buffalo, Bellingham, etc.) where none of the international taxes and customs/immgration fees applicable to transborder flights apply.

So what.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 11):Personally - I oppose tax inclusive pricing. I want the public to know how much they are paying in taxes. I also oppose withholding. Again - people need to feel the pain of that major check. What I think is ridiculous is that my $188 RT fare DEN-SEA next month as 99.17 in taxes.

I oppose not being shown what I will be charged. If you want to make a statement about taxes then state x of the total price is taxes but show me the total first.

The bold displayed prices should include:
The base price fare
Any and all Federal or Government Taxes, Security Fees, Airport fees
Any and all payment fees with the use of credit or debit cards
Any fuel surcharges

Adjacent to the price should be in print at least 1/4 as high as the base price but not smaller that 8 pts., any cabin or checked bag or related fees.

Quoting cmf (Reply 8):Why will a US competitor be able to advertise at a lower price? If they advertise at the same place they are required to follow the same rules

Well not according to the domestic airlines who have claimed that non-Canadian airlines may be exempt from the ruling (if the fares are listed on a foreign website, is it considered advertising in Canada?)

In the OP's link, the Minister of State for Transport is quoted implying that indeed, domestic airlines could be at a disadvantage. How do you suppose that might be?

On Friday, Fletcher defended the government's decision to wait and said it didn't want to put airlines at a competitive disadvantage

Quoting threepoint (Reply 14):On Friday, Fletcher defended the government's decision to wait and said it didn't want to put airlines at a competitive disadvantage

The government just has to frame the legislation that for flights departing Canadian airports, the full inclusive price has to be advertised. UA or DL advertising flights from Australia quote the inclusive fare.

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 11):
Personally - I oppose tax inclusive pricing. I want the public to know how much they are paying in taxes.

In Australia the amount of Fees/Taxes/Charges is required to be printed on the eTicket.

"We recognize that the travelling public have been asking for all-inclusive fare advertising, and we have been looking at this very closely," Air Canada said in a statement.

"Air Canada supports this initiative by the federal government if it meets consumer needs and have said publicly for years that we would happily comply with whatever advertising rules the government wishes to implement provided they apply equally to all carriers, domestic and foreign, against which we compete."

WestJet also supported the change.

"WestJet is in favour of all-in pricing to provide the travelling public with comparability among all airlines," said a statement from the airline."

If I can get from virtually one point in Europe to another for such a low price, why not here?

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 11):Personally - I oppose tax inclusive pricing. I want the public to know how much they are paying in taxes

I am the opposite, I despise added tax. The Germans have it down pat, you pay what you advertise and if you want to know how much tax your paying, simply look at the receipt ... simple, clean and smart.

Quoting threepoint (Reply 14):Well not according to the domestic airlines who have claimed that non-Canadian airlines may be exempt from the ruling (if the fares are listed on a foreign website, is it considered advertising in Canada?)

You always play by the rules of where something is located. When advertising in a Canadian magazine you need to follow Canadian rules. When advertising in an Indian magazine you follow Indian rules. If for some reason you read the Indian magazine in Canada there is no requirement for the publisher to change the content to follow Canadian rules.

On the Internet it is a bit trickier as you borders are easier to cross but for the most part you need to follow the rules of the country where the company owning the web site is located.

So if a price is shown on a Canadian web site I do not understand how the non-Canadian airline will be allowed to show a non-inclusive price. It would be against how this kind of rules are practiced every where else.

But if you as a Canadian consumer compare Air Canada's web site with the price first shown on American Airlines web site then you need a lot of knowledge to figure out how to make apples to apples comparison. (Actually you need to click through to just before purchasing the ticket on AA to get the price they could have show from the beginning.)

Quoting threepoint (Reply 14):In the OP's link, the Minister of State for Transport is quoted implying that indeed, domestic airlines could be at a disadvantage. How do you suppose that might be?

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 10):Yes, but US carriers can also advertise domestic fares from nearby US border points (e.g. Buffalo, Bellingham, etc.) where none of the international taxes and customs/immgration fees applicable to transborder flights apply.

As someone with significant transborder travel experience, its not the tax/fee difference that makes that choice happen - because the difference is only about $30-$40. The real difference is simply that the airlines charge more for perception.

If I can get from virtually one point in Europe to another for such a low price, why not here?

True, I just booked Ryanair MAD - ACE for 29 euro incl tax. I print my own bourdingpass and have handluggage only. That is good for a 3 hour flight.

I am actually the type that prefers the basefare and all other fees to be seperated. I want to know to which agency my tax money goes, and how much the fuel surcharges are. Within europe you can come across very different amount of fuel charges on the same route.

I would love to see strict pricing rules in the U.S. so we could eliminate extremely dishonest pricing that the airlines have adopted on international flights. A base price of $290.60 for a total of $803.50. The airline $440 for an "international surcharge" under taxes and fees. Lets be honest and call the base price $730.60.

Absolutely. I just quickly found LTN-LPA - over 1,800 miles and 4h 25m block - for £15.99 one-way including taxes/charges although excluding the £6 card fee. Thus, £21.99 is all I would pay if I were to take the flight as I don't take checked luggage.

[Edited 2011-12-17 07:36:11]

"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."